"Hedge Fund Billionaire Spends $13 Million Supporing Ted Cruz, Then Immediately Flips To Hillary Clinton". "Early life and education". "Donald Trump Calls Hillary Clinton “Trigger Happy” as She Courts Neocons". Drooling in anticipation of many, many, many more Wars For The Jews: "Is There a Hillary Doctrine?"

"Another US-Sponsored Coup? Brazil's New President Was An Embassy Informant For US Intelligence" "WikiLeaks Exposes Newly “Selected” Brazilian President as Puppet for US Intelligence" "Venezuela's Maduro: Rousseff Impeachment Trial 'Made in the USA'"

"Is There Any Backbone Left in the EU in the Face of Erdogan’s Blackmail?"

"Top Hizbullah Commander in Syria killed in Explosion" Probably Israeli targeted assassination by an illegal air strike on Syria.

"As an account of the incentives that arise out of FPTP, it
is exactly wrong. In fact, is systems of proportional representation
(PR) that tend to give rise to issue-specific parties that target a
narrow base of Canadians. That is why niche-issue parties like the
Greens are so keen on moving to PR. Furthermore, if it is the building
of a “consensus” you want, again you aren’t going to get it from PR. As
narrowcast parties proliferate, the resulting parliament will be a
beggar’s banquet of horse-trading, log-rolling, and gutter brinkmanship,
with voters left looking on in anguish and impotence.

In contrast, the logic of FPTP inevitably leads to the
creation of “big tent” parties that have comprehensive platforms
designed to appeal to wide swaths of the country. And as the McGill law
professor Daniel Weinstock argues in a new paper, this means that
parties under FPTP tend to be excellent forums for deliberation and
national consensus-building, as all the single-issue constituencies come
to the table to get a hearing inside the tent.

In short, the virtues that Monsef wants to see in Canadian
politics are pretty much already fulfilled by the current electoral
system. Instead of wasting its time trying to find a new electoral
system, her special committee would do well to figure out ways of
helping Canadians understand the one we have."

"So, here it is. Yet, there is one detail here that is
missing and that is a very important one. As a real ME scholar (who
would eat for breakfast any "expert" from Brookings or any other
pseudo-think-tank) Evgeniy Satanovsky points out, all this relative terrorist calm in the US is mostly due to...well, I'll quote:

The reason for the absence of resonance terrorist acts in the USA is a mute agreement between Saudi Arabia and Qatar who are the main sponsors of jihadism. It is decided to not touch the US in order to avoid the risk of repeating Afghan or Iraq scenarios. (c)"

"Hedge Fund Billionaire Spends $13 Million Supporing Ted Cruz, Then Immediately Flips To Hillary Clinton". "Early life and education". "Donald Trump Calls Hillary Clinton “Trigger Happy” as She Courts Neocons". Drooling in anticipation of many, many, many more Wars For The Jews: "Is There a Hillary Doctrine?"

"Another US-Sponsored Coup? Brazil's New President Was An Embassy Informant For US Intelligence" "WikiLeaks Exposes Newly “Selected” Brazilian President as Puppet for US Intelligence" "Venezuela's Maduro: Rousseff Impeachment Trial 'Made in the USA'"

"Is There Any Backbone Left in the EU in the Face of Erdogan’s Blackmail?"

"Top Hizbullah Commander in Syria killed in Explosion" Probably Israeli targeted assassination by an illegal air strike on Syria.

"As an account of the incentives that arise out of FPTP, it
is exactly wrong. In fact, is systems of proportional representation
(PR) that tend to give rise to issue-specific parties that target a
narrow base of Canadians. That is why niche-issue parties like the
Greens are so keen on moving to PR. Furthermore, if it is the building
of a “consensus” you want, again you aren’t going to get it from PR. As
narrowcast parties proliferate, the resulting parliament will be a
beggar’s banquet of horse-trading, log-rolling, and gutter brinkmanship,
with voters left looking on in anguish and impotence.

In contrast, the logic of FPTP inevitably leads to the
creation of “big tent” parties that have comprehensive platforms
designed to appeal to wide swaths of the country. And as the McGill law
professor Daniel Weinstock argues in a new paper, this means that
parties under FPTP tend to be excellent forums for deliberation and
national consensus-building, as all the single-issue constituencies come
to the table to get a hearing inside the tent.

In short, the virtues that Monsef wants to see in Canadian
politics are pretty much already fulfilled by the current electoral
system. Instead of wasting its time trying to find a new electoral
system, her special committee would do well to figure out ways of
helping Canadians understand the one we have."

"So, here it is. Yet, there is one detail here that is
missing and that is a very important one. As a real ME scholar (who
would eat for breakfast any "expert" from Brookings or any other
pseudo-think-tank) Evgeniy Satanovsky points out, all this relative terrorist calm in the US is mostly due to...well, I'll quote:

The reason for the absence of resonance terrorist acts in the USA is a mute agreement between Saudi Arabia and Qatar who are the main sponsors of jihadism. It is decided to not touch the US in order to avoid the risk of repeating Afghan or Iraq scenarios. (c)"